Forty Years of Reading Intervention Research for Elementary Students with or at Risk for Dyslexia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Primary school (grades 1–6) Special education and inclusion Reading and writing
Links to claims
Limits (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C32 | Standardised-only reading interventions for K–5 dyslexia-risk: g = 0.33; excluded follow-up-only reports; no follow-up analysis. Used for C32 size weaken 2026-11-01 and time-bound weaken 2026-11-07. |
Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.
Source note
Syntes: Hall et al. (2023) — reading interventions for pupils with or at risk for dyslexia: g = 0.33 on standardised tests
Källa: Hall, C., Dahl-Leonard, K., Cho, E., Solari, E. J., Capin, P., Conner, C. L., Henry, A. R., Cook, L., Hayes, L., Vargas, I., Richmond, C. L. & Kehoe, K. F. (2023). Forty Years of Reading Intervention Research for Elementary Students with or at Risk for Dyslexia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Reading Research Quarterly 58(2), 285–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.477
Verified content
- [full text] 53 studies (52 publications), 351 effect sizes, N = 6,053 pupils in grades K–5 who scored at or below a norm-referenced screening threshold (about the 25th percentile) in word reading, spelling or their foundations. 77% of studies were RCTs; mean sample size about 114.
- [full text] Only standardised, norm-referenced outcomes were used, because researcher-made measures are more closely aligned to what was taught.
- [full text] Overall effect g = 0.33 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.41); I² = 63%. No funnel-plot asymmetry (modified Egger b = 0.02, p = .89).
- [full text] Moderators: higher dosage gave larger effects (b = 0.002 per hour, p = .040); reading comprehension outcomes smaller than word reading/spelling (b = −0.080, p = .024). Grades 3–5 g = 0.16 vs K–2 g = 0.36 (difference not significant). Study design and sample size did not significantly moderate effects.
Limits
- [assessment] Reading only; pupils with or at risk for dyslexia (word-reading difficulties), not all special educational needs; comparison mostly business-as-usual.
Why it is in the library
Applied 2026-11-01 (nightly attacks) against C32's "roughly 0.4 standard deviations": on standardised reading tests the average gain is about a third of a standard deviation.
Added 2026-11-01 by the project. [full text] = read in the PMC author manuscript.
Metadata as recorded
- ID
- SEND-006
- Tier
- meta
- Titel
- Forty Years of Reading Intervention Research for Elementary Students with or at Risk for Dyslexia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Författare
- Hall, C.; Dahl-Leonard, K.; Cho, E.; Solari, E. J.; Capin, P.; Conner, C. L.; Henry, A. R.; Cook, L.; Hayes, L.; Vargas, I.; Richmond, C. L.; Kehoe, K. F.
- År
- 2023 (online 2022)
- Källa/DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.477
- Tidskrift
- Reading Research Quarterly 58(2), 285–312
- URL
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13480413/ (author manuscript, PMC)
- Typ
- meta-analysis of 53 experimental and quasi-experimental studies (1980–2020; 77% RCTs; N = 6,053) of reading interventions for K–5 pupils with or at risk for dyslexia; norm-referenced (standardised) outcomes only; robust variance estimation
- Åldersgrupp
- grundskola-lag
- Teman
- specialpedagogik-och-inkludering;lasning-och-skrivande
- Hämtad
- 2026-11-01
- Paywall
- open access (Unpaywall: publisher + PMC)
- Verifierad
- Crossref DOI 10.1002/rrq.477 checked 2026-11-01 (title, 12 authors, RRQ 58(2) 285–312); numbers from the full text
- Status
- added 2026-11-01 (nightly attacks); C32 weakened.
The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.